Rush On Phil Robertson Firing: I’m Not So Sure That This Is A Loss

RUSH: The Human Rights Campaign has slammed Phil Robertson by saying, “We know that being gay is not a choice that someone makes and that to suggest otherwise can be incredibly harmful.” But substitute “heterosexual” for gay and see how it sounds. We know that being heterosexual is not a choice someone makes, and that to suggest otherwise could be incredibly harmful. Well, Phil Robertson didn’t make the choice to be a heterosexual, so why attack him for talking like one? If you turn this stuff all around, it’s an interesting perspective.

Now, I had a lot of people e-mail me when they first heard about this, and they were wringing their hands. The said, “Well, Rush, the liberals win again. We had this great show, this great family down there, the Robertson family, got their duck call business, Duck Dynasty, and why do people on our side keep talking to the liberal media? Why would Phil Robertson, who doesn’t care about the way he looks, do an interview in GQ? Why, Rush, why? Can you explain this to me, Rush? ‘Cause the liberals have won again. A&E has shut up Phil for quoting the Bible and offering a rather obvious opinion on why straight men love women.” I mean, he kind of nailed that, if you want to know the truth about it.

No, I’m not gonna get into repeating it here, but he offered a pretty straightforward reason why straight guys like women. It made perfect sense. But then that’s why I started looking into this. I’m not so sure, folks, and it’s too soon to know, but I’m not so sure that this is a loss, in the traditional sense. I’m not so sure this is a loss like it would be with the Republican Party caving doing something stupid and then begging forgiveness or any of that.

Read More @

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Comment